What is overpriced.

Yeah, that was at the beginning of my time on HF. It boggled the mind to see that.

 

Not really fair to slam the HF crowd for this, it's just how society works these days, we've been brain washed by marketing and pr firms for god knows how long. Every product line out there operates in this fashion once a particular goods market matures with enough established brands/products. From luxury goods/services down to supermarket grocery items, you can't avoid it. Unfortunately average consumers don't really care enough to become educated, and the ones that do often get tricked by sites/forums that's really just a part of the marketing machine.

 

I agree completely.

But on the flipside, I think there's a huge market for budget-fi. Many are willing to compromise perceived quality at a lower price point more than they are willing to take a chance on an expensive, unknown commodity. IIRC Jason over at Schiit claims that the modi/magni stack changed their company into what it is today. When those dropped, they were seeing 4-8 times more volume than they were getting from their bifrosts, valhallas, and asgards. Of course, those still sold well... ...just not nearly as good as the stuff that cost half as much at most.

To me, it makes sense. A small handful of people are going to shell out for a Yggdrasil, but the M2U is a respectable piece of equipment in its own right... ...it is a much easier risk to take. More people have the money and will to throw down on that.

And then, beyond that, there is the growing number of mid-fi advocates, who refuse to by TOTL. Diminishing returns are real, but these folks take it to an extreme and insist that more expensive headphones are no better than cheaper ones and refuse to buy summit-fi. What of those people?

So there is a lot of money to be made there. It just goes to show that a lot of people out there don't consider the "TOTL" price bracket viable. It doesn't matter how good they may be - $1000+ for a pair of fricking headphones is just too much. The notion of getting very high quality audio on a budget is appealing to a lot of people. Sometimes I really do think that this is really the majority of the market. The people who debate over the really expensive headphones are just the vocal minority. Most people will never own those headphones. Some people can justify it, but there's no getting around the fact that TOTL is prohibitively priced. And that may just be part of the appeal.

It'll be interesting to see how things go in the next 5-10 years. All I can really say I am sure of right now is that the market is all over the place.

One one hand, there is the "barrier to entry" rule... ...the classic approach in this realm is to pick a strong niche and have a small demographic of people who really love your product and will pay a premium - give them what they want and they will pay you good money. I think this is how many companies still think and operate. But I think the times are changing. High-quality personal audio is not such a niche thing anymore. Everybody wants a peice nowadays. The un-initiated are dipping their toes en masse and I think that represents a huge demand that's only recently started getting tapped into.

I think the real problem here is a lack of information. People are not making educated decisions - and there's good reason for that. Headphones are excruciating to get into. It's hard to figure out what you want between all of the hype and arguments about value. That's what leads a lot of people astray. They get lazy and decide "Well, these are more expensive and people love them, so I'll just buy those and be done with it." But again, the market isn't really stable from year to year right now. That's where all of the confusion comes from. New niches are forming. The voices who shape the market are changing their tunes. Eventually, things will have to plateau and all will be revealed. It's an ongoing process.

I dunno, that's what I think. I've only been feeling things out for a couple of years and don't really know my history that well, so maybe others can correct me where I'm wrong. Just my observations.

 

I welcome all criticisms and alternative lines of thinking. But generally speaking; if I'm able to hear more than the recording engineer in charge of mastering the record... I believe that that's generally a bad thing in terms of overall musical enjoyment. It might work and the results might be stellar, but it's hit and miss. If you want reliable performance a little bit less resolution isn't always a bad thing.

 

strippers damn it! lot of them think they're hot stuff and super special and think they deserve 100 dollar bills but, got news for them, you all suck! worst lap dances ever and not even that hot....ohh,wait..we were talking bout audio stuff right? my bad.

 

Because a lot of TOTL headphones actually sound worse and/or has serious issues like QA and unit variance. Just how many headphones actually do sound better than, say, Sennheiser HD600/650? Unfortunately from my experience, not many. Beyer, AKG, and recently Pioneer come to mind.

This is one of the reasons I cannot take companies, which make TOTL products first, seriously anymore. You just can't start from nearly nothing and expect to make a decent products that warrants 1k+ price tag. Make lesser headphones first. Gain experience and knowledge on good headphones, then make TOTL headphones. Today most of the companies' approach is opposite because they are no longer marketing to normal people, but rich people who only seek to purchase stuffs to show off themselves (remember Woo Audio's story about one rich Hong Kong business man screamed "the most expensive one" when an employee tried to get him a right product?)

If would be ideal if the more expensive ones sound better than cheaper ones, but the too many cases it is opposite, which brings people's distrust and resentment toward audiophile community.

Yes. This is why measurements are so important. Subjective impressions are good, but measurements tell us a lot of things.

 

So true Hifiman learned this and released the HE-1000 at 3k while the HE-6 is just as good or even better.

 

I'm right there with you, man. Price should be determined by performance. You shouldn't have to pay a premium for having different preferences, but similar expectations of sound quality. It would be like if apple flavored gum cost $1, but god forbid you want watermelon from the same brand. That'll run you $20 a pack. It just doesn't make sense and creates this atmosphere of stagnant elitism that turns away prospective buyers.

I agree that companies should start from the bottom. See what works and improve on things as you go along. If each new installment improves on the last, then you can price comparatively and it will actually make sense to people. Marketing to rich people at the price of excluding the general populace is a mistake. The collective market of normal people with certain needs and limited funds is much larger. It's not hard to do. You will have to do more volume, but you also stand to make a lot more money. The only catch is that the price has to match the actual value. Your average person is going to be pissed when their $1000 upgrade sounds worse than their $400 workhorse.

Ideally, I think both are needed. Measurements can reveal obvious problems, while certain aspects of sound can be hard to pin down with measurements. So it's a give and take.

It's touchy business. At the end of the day, the best way to tell if headphones are good is to put them on with nothing on the line. It's easier to be honest when there's no conflict of interest. Someone who owns expensive headphones is going to want to defend them, while someone who's simply heard them has no reason to wax poetic and try to justify the price. Either the sound is worth the money or it isn't. I suppose companies could always offer trial periods. Honestly, I think that would make a bigger difference than trying to change the review/hype game or wising people up to measurements. I can't tell you how many times I was looking at TOTL... ...reviews and measurements had me sold until I heard them... ...especially after hearing the HD600's and later, the 650's. There are a lot of pricier headphones I simply won't consider because of that. A lot of the problems we have now would be solved if everyone was able to try more headphones.

 

Unfortunately, in our consumer economy people don't seem to have any issues paying a little extra for a preferred (or "exclusive") brand, flavor or color. That permeates in all facets of what we consume. Businesses thrive because they know the majority of consumers are willing to pay for differentiation.

Do you really think the "average" person would be able to tell the difference? For most things, by paying more, we're already subconsciously biased into believing more expensive = better. Also, the more exclusive a thing is, and therefore harder to obtain for most consumers, those who can afford them (and don't frequent sites such as SBAF) will enjoy the ownership that much more regardless of what certain metrics (e.g. measurements) may convey. For every negative review, there will be many more glowingly positive reviews on more popular mainstream websites and on "lifestyle" sites that cater to luxury goods. As long as there are enough people willing to spend the money...

Plus you have the trickle-down effect of halo products. If you make your mid-tier product seem like a bargain compared to the overpriced TOTL, and some technology (or even just history) is shared, that'll drive business thanks to the attractiveness of those relative "bargains".

Human psychology is fascinating.

 

Good points. I guess I just tend to expect certain things from people just because of where I'm at and how I make my purchasing decisions. I suppose your average person doesn't consider the things that your average person on here might. In some ways it's the consumer's fault. None of this would be possible if people didn't pay up. And people seem quick to begrudgingly accept the state of the market. They grumble, but ultimately they still pay up because they just gotta have it.

To pay a premium for something fancy that does the same things that cheaper offerings do just as well or very close to it is an absurd proposition to me. They're headphones. I want them to be good at being headphones. That is all that I am willing to pay for. I want to be able to put them on and not have to think about what else I need to buy.

I feel bad when I buy something nice and expensive, but the experience it provides doesn't compare to the cost. In fact, I tend to torment myself over whether the things I do buy are really worth the money. For me, there's no gratification in owning expensive things that don't offer me much outside of the satisfaction of ownership. The commodities I value the most cost me the least and provide me the most comfort and/or enjoyment. I don't buy things to have things, but rather for the experiences they provide me. It's unrealistic to assume that others share that attitude, though. Or maybe its better to call it a difference in expectations and desired experiences. Some of us may very well be into headphones for completely different reasons.

The fascination with expensive things really does boggle my mind, though. I guess I tend to assume that people will want to pay the least for the most they can get because, well... ...it's just logical.

Interesting comment about the trickle-down effect. That's an illusion I can definitely fall prey to. Most likely outcome is that I'll make a compromise and buy used. Most things that I think are overpriced, I will buy used if possible.

The takeaway here is that there are just a lot of things I fundamentally do not understand about some people's buying habits. And that may explain my lack of understanding of why people buy overpriced headphones, or think less of them when the price of one goes down or a more expensive one appears. Me, I look at an expensive headphone and say to myself "There's no way it can be worth that much money." If anything, I'm more likely to delude myself into thinking it's worse than it really is!

Indeed it is.

 

It all depends on perspective. To someone starting out, an Yggdrasil, Gungnir Multibit, probably even Bifrost Multibit would seem overpriced given how cheap a Modi 2U is.

 

Perhaps.

Personally I don't think any of those are really overpriced, depending on what your needs are. All of those DAC's seem to punch a little above their weight class. You can do far worse for the money with any of those. If you have a very resolving headphone and a really transparent amp, then a more capable DAC makes sense. And a more capable product should fetch a higher price. I would never buy one of those just to have one, though.

I think there's a big difference between something being overpriced and simply being beyond one's needs.

 

That's true, except there is one thing different from other luxury makers and audiophile community.

Those expensive luxury products do not usually claim that they are 'better' product than ordinary products in terms of performance. Do you ever see a mechanical watchmaker claiming that it is more accurate than normal electronic watches? They don't, and they purely focus on aesthetic of the watches, and it's their main selling point. And consumers usually know this, too.

Compared to that, Audiophile companies still focus main marketing on sound quality despite they are already acting as luxury brands, because once people recognize them as luxury lifestyle brands, those audiophiles simply stop buy stuffs. Prime example is B&O, which still have not recovered from 2008. Companies realized the issue and they never try to brand themselves as luxury brands, but instead technologically high-performance product brands (which is far from being true.)

My main issue is that unlike other luxury niche markets, the audiophile market is built on false promise in the first place, trying to be something else when it is not.

 

It is. Schiit admits as in their FAQ.

Merrick said 'someone starting out'. For those, anything beyond Modi 2 is outrageous.

Also, if one does not concern much about multi-bit technology and closed-form filter, anything above Modi 2 can be considered as pretty overpriced stuff.

 

That said, the biggest problem is that audiophile market as whole is seriously under-competitive against other luxury niche markets as pure luxury products. Rich people are willing to buy jewelry, watches and supercars, but as seen on B&O's case, it seems it's very hard to convince people to buy luxury audio products unless they are labeled as "super crazy advanced high performance audio."

The main issue is that the audio industry has to be more attractive in general. And in order to be more attractive, the content (a.k.a music) has to be attractive.

It is not coincidence that Hi-Fi craziness started when Classical music market in 90s crashed hard.

 

One sign of over-price is bling.

If it has got a crazy case then you can be sure that that constitutes a large percentage of the purchase price, because that is a simple fact of engineering economics. Even if it actually sounds good, the actual electronics inside must be worth only a fraction of the price.

 

What about.... wood, chrome, leather and carbon-fibre.... on the same device.

 

@TwoEars

Read what Tyll said on the LCD 4's. Carbon fibre, wood and chrome is cheap.

 

It's also about priorities and preferences. I sold mid-fi/high end audio for 7 years, and the vast majority of people look at audio equipment as an appliance so just convincing them to move into something a little better than the mass market stuff can be a challenge.

One of the first systems I ever sold was to a couple that wandered in looking for Sony and Bose. I sold them a small Yamaha / Boston Acoustics system that was about $1500. Because I delivered and set up the system I learned that this couple lived in an expensive house with a gull-wing Mercedes in the garage. They had the money to buy something better but music to them was something that gets played in the background. To them, the system I sold them was expensive and high-end.

 

Working on wood should add some labor/cost though, but not that much for sure.